Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1887-03-28
Materials for Houses.

A correspondent of Northern paper.
who is now for the first time travelling
through the South, expresses surprise be-
cause most of the houses in Southern
towns are built of wood. He saws that
cities contain fair proportion of houses
built of brick or stone, but that in the
smaller towns these materials are seldom
used.
1t is true that most OF the houses In
Southern towns are built of wood. The
reason Is that wood is plentiful and cheap,
and there is widespread belief
that it is better suited to
warm climate. Architects may
agree that wood is cheaper, but they do
not think it more suitable than brick or
stone to a warm climate. They claim
that 1t is certainly not cooler than the
latter materials, although it is the i'm
preston that it is which causes 1t to be
regarded with favor. Architects and
hygienists unite in declaring that wood
is not as healthy as brick or stone. They
say it soon decays and produces sick
ness. A hygienist, who has devoted much
attention to the matter, says that much
of the sickness in Southern
towns which is charged to malaria
is the result of living in wooden houses
that have begun to decay. He says, also,
that wooden houses, after standing a few
years, are always more or less damp, and
that 1t is well known that colds and pneu-
monia are more prevalent among their
occupants than among those who live In
houses of brick or stone. He goes even a
step further, and says that one OF the
chief reasons why the people of the South
do not possess the clear, rosy compilations
of the people of the North, or OF EnglarA,
is that they live in wooden houses.
OF course, much that is taught by ar
chitects and hygienists about the con-
struction OF houses is worthy OF atten-
ton, but it is by no mans certain that
their conclusions about the healthfulness
of wooden houses are correct. Even if
they are, it is well known that houses OF
brick or stone also have their drawbacks.
1t is claimed, for instance, that the close
ness OF the latter tends to promote pul.
morisry diseases. The main objections to
wooden houses are that they are
not durable, and that they re-
quire repairs oftener than houses
OF brick or stone. A New York
architect has prepared a little volume in
which he shows that even in building the
smallest house it is cheaper, in the long
run, to use brick or stone than 1t Is touso
wood. In the matter Of paint alone, a
wooden house, to look well, should re.
eeive coat every three years. In very
warm climate, like that OF Florida, il
should DO reprinted even oftener. A
house OF brick or stone, il properly con-
structsd, never needs paint. This archi-
tect also points out that after standing a
few years wooden house is
in constant need OF other
repairs, whereas a house OF brick or stone
may stand twenty-five years without re-
curing to be touched. In the matter of
fires, he shows that except in crowded
cities, house OF brick or stone seldom
suffers by fire, whereas a wooden house,
even whom detached from others, is
always in danger from that element. II
stores were built OF wood, he says, they
would have TO be rebuilt every ten wears,
for they would be burned down that often
On the score OF economy, therefore, 1t
would seem that those who build should
use brick or stone.